The Dancing Mouse Part 6

Rawitz, Cyon, and Alexander and Kreidl felt themselves under the necessity of finding peculiarities of behavior in the dancer which could be referred to the various abnormalities of structure which they had either seen or accepted on faith; Kishi found himself in a very different predicament, for he had on his hands the commonly accepted statement that the animals are deaf, without being able to find any structural basis for this defect.

To avoid the difficulty he questions the existence of deafness! If perchance they are deaf, he thinks that it is possibly because of the defect in the stria vasculosa. This suggestion Kishi makes despite the fact that our ignorance of the function of the stria renders it impossible for us to do otherwise than guess at its relation to hearing.

We have now briefly reviewed the results of the various important investigations of the behavior and structure of the dancer.

The observations of Cyon, Zoth, and the writer establish beyond doubt the existence of important individual differences in behavior if not of distinct divisions within the species of mouse, and the general results of the several anatomical investigations make it seem highly probable that the structure of the ear, as well as the externally visible structural features of the animals, vary widely. Unfortunately, the lack of agreement in the descriptions of the ear given by the different students of the subject renders impossible any certain correlation of structural and functional facts. That the whirling and the lack of dizziness and of hearing have their structural bases no one doubts, but whether it is in the brain itself, in the sense organs, or in the labyrinth, our knowledge does not permit us to say. With this statement Rawitz, Cyon, and Alexander and Kreidl would not agree, for they believe that they have discovered structural peculiarities which fully explain the behavior of the dancer.

Panse and Kishi, on the other hand, contend that the ear gives no structural signs of such peculiarities as the dancing and deafness suggest; they therefore look to the cerebellum for the seat of the disturbance. With the same possibility in mind the author of "Fancy Varieties of Mice" writes: "These quaint little creatures make amusing pets for any one who is not scientific, or very fond of knowing 'the reason why.' In their case, the reason of the peculiarity which gives them their name is rather a sad one. It is now pretty conclusively established that they are no more j.a.panese than they are of any other country in particular, but that the originators of the breed were common fancy mice which were suffering from a disease of the brain a.n.a.logous to the 'gid' in sheep. In the latter, the complaint is caused by a parasite in the brain; in the case of the Waltzing Mouse, it is probably due to an hereditary malformation therein. Be this as it may, the breed is now a firmly established one, and the children of waltzing mice waltz like their parents" (32 p. 45). Although it is quite possible that peculiarities in the central nervous system, rather than in the peripheral nervous system, may be responsible for the forms of behavior exhibited by the dancer, it must be remembered that no such peculiarities have been revealed by the examination of the central nervous system. The old fancier has neither better nor worse grounds for his belief than have Panse and Kishi.

So far as the reliability of the anatomical work which has been discussed is in question, it would seem that Rawitz's results are rendered somewhat unsatisfactory by the carelessness of Cyon in fixing the materials; that Panse's descriptions and comparisons are neither careful nor detailed enough to be convincing; that the work of Alexander and Kreidl, as well as that of Kishi, gives evidence of accuracy and trustworthiness. The fact that the statements of Alexander and Kreidl frequently do not agree with those of Kishi proves that there are serious errors in the work of one or another of these investigators. Cyon's discussion of the anatomy of the dancer is not to be taken too seriously, for by his theory of s.p.a.ce perception and of a sixth sense he was unduly biased in favor of the structural peculiarities described by Rawitz. Nevertheless, his discussion is not without interest, for the way in which he succeeded in making every structural fact which Rawitz suggested fit into his theories and help to account for the functional peculiarities which he had himself observed, is extremely clever and indicates a splendid scientific imagination.

To sum up: All the facts of behavior and physiology which have been established lead us to expect certain marked structural differences between the dancer and the common mouse. The bizarre movements, lack of equilibrational ability, and the nervous shaking of the head suggest the presence of peculiar conditions in the semicircular ca.n.a.ls or their sense organs; and the lack of sensitiveness to sounds indicates defects in the cochlea. Yet, strange as it may seem to those who are not familiar with the difficulties of the study of the minute structure of these organs, no structural conditions have been discovered which account satisfactorily for the dancer's peculiarities of behavior. That the ear is unusual in form is highly probable, since three of the four investigators who have studied it carefully agree that it differs more or less markedly from that of the common mouse. But, on the other hand, the serious lack of agreement in their several descriptions of the conditions which they observed renders their results utterly inconclusive and extremely unsatisfactory.

The status of our knowledge of the structure of the central nervous system is even less satisfactory, if possible, than that of our knowledge of those portions of the peripheral nervous system which would naturally be supposed to have to do with such functional peculiarities as the dancer exhibits. So far as I have been able to learn, no investigator has carefully examined the brain and spinal cord in comparison with those of the common mouse, and only those who have failed to find any structural basis for the facts of behavior in the organs of the ear have attempted to account for the dancer's whirling and deafness by a.s.suming that the cerebellum is unusual in structure. We are, therefore, forced to conclude that our knowledge of the nervous system of the dancing mouse does not at present enable us to explain the behavior of the animal.

It seems highly probable to me, in the light of my observation of the dancer and my study of the entire literature concerning the animal, that no adequate explanation of its activities can be given in terms of the structure of the peripheral or the central nervous system, or of both, but that the structure of the entire organism will have to be taken into account. The dancer's physiological characteristics, in fact, suggest mult.i.tudinous structural peculiarities. I have confined my study to its behavior, not because the problems of structure seemed less interesting or less important, but simply because I found it necessary thus to limit the field of research in order to accomplish what I wished within a limited period.

That there are structural bases for the forms of behavior which this book describes is as certain as it could be were they definitely known; that they, or at least some of them, are discoverable by means of our present- day histological methods is almost as certain. It is, therefore, obvious that this is an excellent field for further research. It is not an agreeable task to report inconclusive and contradictory results, and I have devoted this chapter to a brief account of the work that has been done by others on the structure of the ear of the dancer rather for the sake of presenting a complete account of the animal as it is known to-day than because of the value of the facts which could be stated.

CHAPTER VI

THE SENSE OF HEARING

Repeatedly in the foregoing chapters mention has been made of the dancer's irresponsiveness to sounds, but it has not been definitely stated whether this peculiarity of behavior is due to deafness or to the inhibition of reaction. This chapter is concerned with the evidence which bears upon the problem of the existence of a sense of hearing. Again I may be permitted to call attention to the observations of other investigators before presenting the results of my own experiments and stating the conclusions which I have reached through the consideration of all available facts.

By the results of various simple tests which he made, Rawitz (25 p. 238) was convinced that the adult dancer is totally deaf. He did not experiment with the young, but he says he thinks they may be able to hear, since the necessary structural conditions are present. This guess which Rawitz made on the basis of very indefinite and uncertain knowledge of the histology of the ear of the young dancer is of special interest in the light of facts revealed by my own experiments. Unfortunately the study of hearing made by Rawitz is casual rather than thorough, and although it may turn out that all of his statements are justified by his observations, the reader is not likely to get much satisfaction from his discussion of the subject.

Inasmuch as he could discover no structural basis for deafness, Panse (23 p. 140) expressed himself as unwilling to believe that the mice are deaf, and this despite the fact that he observed no responses to the sounds made by a series of tuning forks ranging from C5 to C8. He believes rather that they are strangely irresponsive to sounds and that their sensitiveness is dulled, possibly, by the presence of plugs of wax in the ears. Since another investigator, Kishi, has observed the presence of similar plugs of wax in the ears of common mice which could hear, there is but slight probability that Panse is right in considering the plugs of wax as the cause of the dancer's irresponsiveness to sounds.

Far more thoroughgoing tests than those of Rawitz or Panse were made by Cyon (9 p. 218), who holds the unique position of being the only person on record who has observed the adult dancer give definite reactions to sounds. To a Konig Galton whistle so adjusted that it gave a tone of about 7000 complete vibrations per second, which is said to be about the pitch of the voice of the dancer, some of the animals tested by Cyon responded unmistakably, others not at all. In one group of four mice, two not only reacted markedly to the sound of the whistle but apparently listened intently, for as soon as the whistle was blown they ran to the side of the cage and pressed their noses against the walls as if attempting to approach the source of the stimulus. The remaining two mice gave not the slightest indication that the sound acted as a stimulus. By the repet.i.tion of this sound from eight to twelve times Cyon states that he was able to arouse the mice from sleep. When thus disturbed, the female came out of the nest box before the male. Similarly when the mice were disturbed by the whistle in the midst of their dancing, the female was first to retreat into the nest box. There is thus, according to Cyon, some indication of s.e.x, as well as individual, differences in sensitiveness to the sound of the whistle. Cyon's statement that in order to evoke a response the whistle must be held above the head of the dancer suggests at once the possibility that currents of air or odors instead of sounds may have been responsible for the reactions which he observed. The work of this investigator justifies caution in the acceptance of his statements.

Neither the conditions under which the auditory tests were made nor the condition of the animals is described with sufficient accuracy to make possible the comparison of Cyon's work with that of other investigators.

As will appear later, it is of the utmost importance that the influence of other stimuli than sound be avoided during the tests and that the age of the mouse be known. The conclusion reached by Cyon is that some dancers are able to hear sounds of about the pitch of their own cries.

The fact, emphasized by Cyon, that the mice respond to tones of about the pitch of their own voice is of peculiar interest in its relation to the additional statements made by the same author to the effect that the female dancer is more sensitive to sounds than the male, and that the males either do not possess a voice or are much less sensitive to disagreeable stimuli than the females. In the case of the dancers which he first studied (9 p. 218), Cyon observed that certain strong stimuli evoked pain cries; but later in his investigation he noticed that four individuals, all of which were males, never responded thus to disagreeable stimulation (11 p.431). He asks, therefore, does this mean that the males lack a voice or that they are less sensitive than the females? The fact that he did not succeed in getting a definite answer to this simple question is indicative of the character of Cyon's work. My dancers have provided me with ample evidence concerning the matter. Both the males and the females, among the dancers which I have studied, possess a voice.

The females, especially during periods of s.e.xual excitement, are much more likely to squeak than the males. At such times they give their shrill cry whenever they are touched by another mouse or by the human hand. A slight pinching of the tail will frequently cause the female to squeak, but the male seldom responds to the same stimulus by crying out. The most satisfactory way to demonstrate the existence of a voice in the male is to subject him to the stimulating effect of an induced current, so weak that it is barely appreciable to the human hand. To this unexpected stimulus even the male usually responds by a sudden squeak. There can be no doubt, then, of the possession of a voice by both males and females. The males may be either less sensitive or less given to vocal expression, but they are quite able to squeak when favorable conditions are presented. The possession of a voice by an animal is presumptive evidence in favor of a sense of hearing, but it would scarcely be safe to say that the mice must be able to hear their own voices. Cyon, however, thinks that some dancers can. What further evidence is to be had?

Although they obtained no visible motor reactions to such noises as the clapping of the hands, the snapping of the fingers, or to the tones of tuning forks of different pitches and the shrill tones of the Galton whistle, Alexander and Kreidl (1 p. 547) are not convinced of the total deafness of the dancer, for, as they remark, common mice which undoubtedly hear do not invariably respond visibly to sounds. Furthermore, the anatomical conditions revealed by their investigation of the ear of the dancer are not such as to render sensitiveness to sounds impossible. They recognize also that the existence of the ability to produce sounds is an indication of hearing. They have no confidence in the results reported by Cyon, for they feel that he did not take adequate precautions to guard against the action of other than auditory stimuli.

Zoth (31 p. 170) has pointed out with reason and force that testing the sensitiveness of the mice is especially difficult because of their restlessness. They are almost constantly executing quick, jerky movements, starting, stopping, or changing the direction of movement, and it is therefore extremely difficult to tell with even a fair degree of certainty whether a given movement which occurs simultaneously with a sound is a response to the sound or merely coincident with it. With great care in the exclusion of the influence of extraneous stimuli, Zoth tried a large number of experiments to test the hearing of both young and adult dancers.

Not once did he observe an indubitable auditory reaction. As he says, "I have performed numerous experiments with the Galton whistle, with a squeaking gla.s.s stopper, with caps and cartridges, without being able to come to any certain conclusion. With reference to the Galton whistle and particularly to the tone which was said to have been heard extremely well by Cyon's mice, I believe I am rather safe in a.s.serting that my mice, young (12-13 days) as well as old, do not react to the Konig Galton whistle (7210 Vs.). They could not be awakened out of sleep by repet.i.tions of the sound, nor enticed out of their nests, and their dancing could not be interrupted" (31 p. 170). Zoth's experiments appear to be the most careful and critical of those thus far considered.

Last to be mentioned, but in many respects of greatest interest and value, is the work of Kishi (21 p. 482) on the problem of hearing. To this acute observer belongs the credit of calling attention emphatically to the ear movements which are exhibited by the dancer. Frequently, as he remarks, the ears move as if the animal were listening or trying to determine the direction whence comes a sound, yet usually the mouse gives no other sign of hearing. That the absence of ordinary reactions to sounds is due to deafness, Kishi, like Panse, is led to doubt because his anatomical studies have not revealed any defects in the organs of hearing which would seem to indicate the lack of this sense.

This historical survey of the problem of hearing has brought out a few important facts. No one of the several investigators of the subject, with the exception of Cyon, is certain that the dancer can hear, and no one of them, with the exception of Rawitz, is certain that it cannot hear! Cyon almost certainly observed two kinds of dancing mice. Those of his dancers which exhibited exceptional ability to climb in the vertical direction and which also gave good evidence of hearing certain sounds may have been hybrids resulting from the crossing of the dancer with a common mouse, or they may have been exceptional specimens of the true dancer variety. A third possibility is suggested by Rawitz's belief in the ability of the young dancer to hear. Cyon's positive results may have been obtained with immature individuals. I am strongly inclined to believe that Cyon did observe two types of dancer, and to accept his statement that some of the mice could hear, whereas others could not. It is evident, in the light of our examination of the experimental results thus far obtained by other investigators, that neither the total lack of sensitiveness to sounds in the adult nor the presence of such sensitiveness in the young dancer has been satisfactorily proved.

I shall now report in detail the results of my own study of the sense of hearing in the dancer. As the behavior of the young differs greatly from that of the adult, by which is meant the s.e.xually mature animal, I shall present first the results of my experiments with adults and later, in contrast, the results obtained with mice from one to twenty-eight days old.

My preliminary tests were made with noises. While carefully guarding against the interference of visual, tactual, temperature, and olfactory stimuli, I produced noises of varying degrees of loudness by clapping the hands together suddenly, by shouting, whistling, exploding pistol caps, striking steel bars, ringing an electric bell, and causing another mouse to squeak. To these sounds a common mouse usually responds either by starting violently, or by trembling and remaining perfectly quiet for a few seconds, as if frightened. The adult dancers which I have tested, and I have repeated the experiment scores of times during the last three years with more than a hundred different individuals, have never given unmistakable evidence of hearing. Either they are totally deaf or there is a most surprising lack of motor reactions.

Precisely the same results were obtained in tests made with the Galton whistle throughout its range of pitches, and with Appuun whistles which, according to their markings, ranged from 2000 Vs. (C_4) to 48,000 (G_9), but which undoubtedly did not correspond at all exactly to this range, and with a series of Konig tuning forks which gave tones varying in pitch from 1024 to 16,382 complete vibrations.

I am willing to trust these experimental results the more fully because during all the time I have had adult dancers under observation I have never once seen a reaction which could with any fair degree of certainty be referred to an auditory stimulus. Never once, although I have tried repeatedly, have I succeeded in arousing a dancer from sleep by producing noises or tones, nor have I ever been able to observe any influence of sounds on the dance movements. All of Cyon's signs have failed with my mice. Occasionally what looked like a response to some sound appeared, but critical observation invariably proved it to be due to some other cause than the auditory stimulus. A sound produced above the animal is very likely to bring about a motor reaction, as Cyon claims; but I have always found it to be the result of the currents of air or odors, which usually influence the animal when the experimenter is holding any object above it.

I do not wish to maintain that Cyon's conclusions are false; I merely emphasize the necessity for care in the exclusion of other stimuli. The mice are extremely sensitive to changes in temperature, such, for example, as are produced by the breath of the experimenter, and one must constantly guard against the misinterpretation of behavior.

In a single experiment with mice over a month old, I observed what might possibly indicate sensitiveness to sound. While holding a mouse, thirty- five days old, in my hand I pursed my lips and made a very shrill sound by drawing in air; the mouse seemed to start perceptibly according to the indications given by my sense of touch. I repeated the stimulus several times and each time I could see and feel the animal start slightly. With two other individuals which I tested the reaction was less certain, and with several others I failed to get any indication of response. This would seem to prove that the three individuals which responded happened to be sensitive to that particular tone at the age of five weeks. The test is unsatisfactory because the vibrations from my own body may have brought about the reaction instead of the air vibrations produced by my lips, and I therefore merely mention it in the enumeration of the various experimental tests which I have made.

If we should conclude from all the negative evidence that is available, or that could be obtained, that the dancer is totally deaf, it might fairly be objected that the conclusion is unsafe, since an animal does not necessarily respond to stimuli by a visible change in the position or relations of its body. Death feigning may fairly be considered a response to a stimulus or stimulus complex, yet there may be no sign of movement.

The green frog when observed in the laboratory usually gives no indication whatever, by movements that are readily observable, that it hears sounds which occur about it, but I have been able to show by means of indirect methods of study that it is stimulated by these same sounds.[1] Its rate of respiration is changed by the sounds, and although a sound does not bring about a bodily movement, it does very noticeably influence movements in response to other stimuli which occur simultaneously with the sound. I discovered that under certain rather simple experimental conditions the green frog would regularly respond to a touch on the back by drawing its hind leg up toward the body. Under the same conditions the sound of an electric bell caused no visible movement of the leg, but if at the instant the back was touched the bell was rung, the leg movement was much greater than that brought about by the touch alone. This suggests at once the desirability of studying the sense of hearing in the dancer by some indirect method. The animal may be stimulated, and yet it may not give any visible sign of the influence of the auditory stimulus.

[Footnote 1: "The Sense of Hearing in Frogs." _Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology_, Vol. XV, p. 288, 1905.]

Were not the dancing so extremely variable in rapidity and duration, it might be used as an index of the influence of auditory stimuli. Cyon's statements would indicate that sounds interfere with the dancing, but as I obtained no evidence of this, I worked instead with the following indirect method, which may be called the method of auditory choice.

The apparatus which was used is described in detail in Chapter VII.

Figures 14 and 15 will greatly aid the reader in understanding its essential features. Two small wooden boxes, identical in form and as closely similar as possible in general appearance, were placed in a larger box in such positions that a mouse was forced to enter and pa.s.s through one of them in order to get to the nest-box. On the bottom of each of these small boxes was a series of wires through which an electric current could be made to pa.s.s at the will of the experimenter. The boxes could readily be interchanged in position. At one side of the large wooden box and beyond the range of vision of the mouse was an electric bell which could be caused to ring whenever the mouse approached the entrance to one of the small boxes. The point of the experiment was to determine whether the dancer could learn to avoid the box-which-rang when it was approached.

The method of conducting the tests was as follows. Each day at a certain hour the mouse was placed in that part of the large box whence it could escape to the nest-box only by pa.s.sing through one of the small boxes. If it approached the wrong box (whether it happened to be the one on the right or the one on the left depended upon the experimenter's decision), the bell began to ring as a warning against entering; if it approached the other box, all was silent. As motives for the choice of the box-which-did- not-ring both reward and punishment were employed. The reward consisted of freedom to return to the nest-box _via_ the pa.s.sage which led from the box-which-did-not-ring; the punishment, which consisted of a disagreeable electric shock, was given whenever the mouse entered the wrong box, that is, the one which had the sound as a warning. Entering the wrong box resulted in a disagreeable stimulus and in the necessity of returning to the large box, for the exit to the nest-box by way of the pa.s.sage from this box was closed. My a.s.sumption, on the basis of extended study of the ability of the dancer to profit by experience, was that if it could hear the sound of the bell it would soon learn to avoid the box-that-rang and enter instead the one which had no sound a.s.sociated with it.

Systematic tests were made with No. 4 from the 3d to the 12th of February, inclusive, 1906. Each day the mouse was permitted to find his way to the nest-box through one of the small boxes ten times in succession. Usually the experimenter rang the bell alternately for the box on the left and the box on the right. The time required for such a series of experiments varied, according to the rapidity with which the mouse made his choice, from ten to thirty minutes. If in these experiments the animal approached and entered the right, or soundless box, directly, the choice indicated nothing so far as ability to hear is concerned; if it entered the wrong, or sounding box, despite the ringing of the bell, it indicated either the lack of the influence of experience or inability to hear the sound; but if it regularly avoided the box-which-sounded it thus gave evidence of ability to hear the sound of the bell. The purpose of the test was to determine, not whether the mouse could learn, but whether it could hear.

For ten successive days this experiment was carried on with No. 4 without the least indication of increasing ability to avoid the wrong box by the a.s.sociation of the sound of the bell with the disagreeable electric shock and failure to escape to the nest-box. In fact, the experiment was discontinued because it became evident that an impossible task had been set for the mouse. Day by day as the tests were in progress I noticed that the animal became increasingly afraid of the entrances to the small boxes; it seemed absolutely helpless in the face of the situation. Partly because of the definiteness of the negative results obtained with No. 4 and partly because of the cruelty of subjecting an animal to disagreeable conditions which it is unable to avoid, the experiment was not repeated with other individuals. I have never conducted an experiment which gave me as much discomfort as this; it was like being set to whip a deaf child because it did not learn to respond to stimuli which it could not feel.

By a very similar method No. 18 was tested for his sensitiveness to the noise and jar from the induction apparatus which was used in connection with many of my experiments on vision and the modifiability of behavior.

In this experiment the wrong box was indicated by the buzzing sound of the apparatus and the slight vibrations which resulted from it. Although No.

18 was tested, as was No. 4, for ten successive days, ten trials each day, it gave no evidence of ability to avoid the box-which-buzzed.

Since both direct and indirect methods of testing the hearing of the dancer have uniformly given negative results, in the case of mice more than five weeks old, I feel justified in concluding that they are totally deaf and not merely irresponsive to sounds.

Rawitz's statements, and the fact that what may have been auditory reactions were obtained with a few individuals of five weeks of age, suggest that the mice may be able to hear at certain periods of life. To discover whether this is true I have tested the young of twenty different litters from the first day to the twenty-eighth, either daily or at intervals of two or three days. In these tests Konig forks, steel bars, and a Galton whistle were used. The results obtained are curiously interesting.

During the first two weeks of life none of the mice which I tested gave any visible motor response to the various sounds used. During the third week certain of the individuals responded vigorously to sudden high tones and loud noises. After the third week I have seen only doubtful signs of hearing. I shall now describe in detail the method of experimentation, the condition of the animals, and the nature of the auditory reactions.

Between the twelfth and the eighteenth day the auditory ca.n.a.l becomes open to the exterior. The time is very variable in different litters, for their rate of growth depends upon the amount of nourishment which the mother is able to supply. Without exception, in my experience, the opening to the ear appears before the eyes are open. Consequently visual stimuli usually are not disturbing factors in the auditory tests with mice less than sixteen days old. There is also a sudden and marked change in the behavior of the mice during the third week. Whereas, for the first fourteen or eighteen days they are rather quiet and deliberate in their movements when removed from the nest, some time in the third week their behavior suddenly changes and they act as if frightened when taken up by the experimenter.

They jump out of his hand, squeak, and sometimes show fight. This is so p.r.o.nounced that it has attracted my attention many times and I have studied it carefully to determine, if possible, whether it is due to some profound change in the nervous system which thus suddenly increases the sensitiveness of the animal or to the development of the s.e.xual organs. I am inclined to think that it is a nervous phenomenon which is intimately connected with the s.e.xual condition. Within a day or two after it appears the mice usually begin to show auditory reactions and continue to do so for three to five days.

I shall now describe the results obtained with a few typical litters. A litter born of Nos. 151 and 152 gave uniformly negative results in all auditory tests up to the fourteenth day. On that day the ears were open, and the following observations were recorded. The five individuals of the litter, four females and one male, were taken from the nest one at a time at 7 A.M. and placed on a piece of paper in the bright sunlight. The warmth of the sun soon quieted them so that auditory tests could be made to advantage. As soon as an individual had become perfectly still, the Galton whistle was held at a distance of about four inches from its head in such a position that it could not be seen nor the currents of air caused by it felt, and suddenly blown. Each of the five mice responded to the first few repet.i.tions of this stimulus by movements of the ears, twitchings of the body, and jerky movements of the legs. The most violent reactions resulted when the individual was lying on its back with its legs extended free in the air. Under such circ.u.mstances the four legs were often drawn together suddenly when the whistle was sounded. Similar responses were obtained with the lip sound already mentioned. Two other observers saw these experiments, and they agreed that there can be no doubt that the mice responded to the sound. The sounds which were effective lay between 5000 and 10,000 complete vibrations.

On the fifteenth day the eyes were just beginning to open. Three of the mice responded definitely to the sounds, but the other two slightly, if at all. On the sixteenth day they were all too persistently active for satisfactory auditory tests, and on the seventeenth, although they were tested repeatedly under what appeared to be favorable conditions, no signs of sensitiveness were noted. Although I continued to test this litter, at intervals of three or four days, for two weeks longer, I did not once observe a response to sound.

This was the first litter with which I obtained perfectly definite, clear- cut responses to sounds. That the reactive ability had not been present earlier than the fourteenth day I am confident, for I had conducted the tests in precisely the same manner daily up to the time of the appearance of the reactions. To argue that the mice heard before the fourteenth day, but were unable to react because the proper motor mechanism had not developed sufficiently would be short-sighted, for if the response depended upon the development of such a mechanism, it is not likely that it would disappear so quickly. I am therefore satisfied that these reactions indicate hearing.

With another litter the following results were obtained. On the thirteenth day each of the eight members of the litter responded definitely and uniformly to the Galton whistle, set at 5 (probably about 8000 complete vibrations), and to a Konig steel bar of a vibration rate of 4096 Vs. The largest individuals, for almost always there are noticeable differences in size among the members of a litter, appeared to be most sensitive to sounds.

On the fifteenth day and again on the seventeenth unmistakable responses to sound were observed; on the eighteenth the responses were indefinite, and on the nineteenth none were obtained. I continued the tests up to the twenty-eighth day without further indications of hearing.

Certain individuals in this litter reacted so vigorously to the loud sound produced by striking the steel bar a sharp blow and also to the Galton whistle, during a period of five days, that I have no hesitation in saying that they evidently heard during that period of their lives. Other members of the litter seemed to be less sensitive; their reactions were sometimes so indefinite as to leave the experimenter in doubt about the presence of hearing.

A third litter, which developed very slowly because of lack of sufficient food, first showed unmistakable reactions to sound on the twenty-first day. On this day only two of the five individuals reacted. The reactions were much more obvious on the twenty-second day, but thereafter they became indefinite.